Dead 159

The 159 died last night in the driveway. I traced the fault to the fact that
the quick release clamp to the negative battery post was barely of a small
enough diameter to actually grip the post. Had to wrap some aluminium foil
around it to make it wider. Poor design.


--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

Simon Mason wrote:
> The 159 died last night in the driveway. I traced the fault to the fact
> that the quick release clamp to the negative battery post was barely of
> a small enough diameter to actually grip the post. Had to wrap some
> aluminium foil around it to make it wider. Poor design.
>
>

Do you like it otherwise? I may be shopping soonish.

--
Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3
Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply)
116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 GTV TS 156 V6 2.5 S2
Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see.
www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk

Catman wrote:
> Simon Mason wrote:
>> The 159 died last night in the driveway. I traced the fault to the
>> fact that the quick release clamp to the negative battery post was
>> barely of a small enough diameter to actually grip the post. Had to
>> wrap some aluminium foil around it to make it wider. Poor design.
>>
>>
>
> Do you like it otherwise? I may be shopping soonish.
>
I like mine......159 JTD 1.9 SW. Other car a 156 JTD 1.9. Very different
but both fun.

Jim wrote:
> Catman wrote:
>> Simon Mason wrote:
>>> The 159 died last night in the driveway. I traced the fault to the
>>> fact that the quick release clamp to the negative battery post was
>>> barely of a small enough diameter to actually grip the post. Had to
>>> wrap some aluminium foil around it to make it wider. Poor design.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Do you like it otherwise? I may be shopping soonish.
>>
> I like mine......159 JTD 1.9 SW. Other car a 156 JTD 1.9. Very different
> but both fun.

Anyone got a V6 around?

So what's the differences like?

--
Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3
Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply)
116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 GTV TS 156 V6 2.5 S2
Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see.
www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk

"Catman" > wrote in message
...
> Simon Mason wrote:
>> The 159 died last night in the driveway. I traced the fault to the fact
>> that the quick release clamp to the negative battery post was barely of a
>> small enough diameter to actually grip the post. Had to wrap some
>> aluminium foil around it to make it wider. Poor design.
>>
>>
>
> Do you like it otherwise? I may be shopping soonish.
>

It's a 2.2 JTS Lusso. £13990 on a 07 plate done 16000 miles. Finding it dead
last night spooked me a little as the 156 it replaced used to have a battery
that was sometimes flat for no apparent reason. Best thing is that it
doesn't seem to burn oil like the 1.8 TS did. Performance is good and other
than getting 24 mpg out of it, I am happy. First service due soon at 18000
miles.


--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

Simon Mason wrote:
>
> "Catman" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Simon Mason wrote:
>>> The 159 died last night in the driveway. I traced the fault to the
>>> fact that the quick release clamp to the negative battery post was
>>> barely of a small enough diameter to actually grip the post. Had to
>>> wrap some aluminium foil around it to make it wider. Poor design.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Do you like it otherwise? I may be shopping soonish.
>>
>
> It's a 2.2 JTS Lusso. £13990 on a 07 plate done 16000 miles. Finding it
> dead last night spooked me a little as the 156 it replaced used to have
> a battery that was sometimes flat for no apparent reason. Best thing is
> that it doesn't seem to burn oil like the 1.8 TS did. Performance is
> good and other than getting 24 mpg out of it, I am happy.

That much? *Luxury*



--
Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3
Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply)
116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 GTV TS 156 V6 2.5 S2
Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see.
www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk

Catman wrote:
> Jim wrote:
>> Catman wrote:
>>> Simon Mason wrote:
>>>> The 159 died last night in the driveway. I traced the fault to the
>>>> fact that the quick release clamp to the negative battery post was
>>>> barely of a small enough diameter to actually grip the post. Had to
>>>> wrap some aluminium foil around it to make it wider. Poor design.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Do you like it otherwise? I may be shopping soonish.
>>>
>> I like mine......159 JTD 1.9 SW. Other car a 156 JTD 1.9. Very
>> different but both fun.
>
> Anyone got a V6 around?
>
> So what's the differences like?
>
The 156, though nice and solid, drives like a smaller car. The 159,
though pretty nimble, drives like a larger car. If that makes any sense?

I've always liked smaller cars.....and quite often take the 156 out of
choice. But when I use the 159 I am always happily surprised ( I know I
shouldn't be) at what a good car it is...very together.

I am a diesel convert for the last 20+ years....mainly on cost grounds
although I do like the torque. I would agree there's nothing quite like
a nice petrol 'V' engine but I simply can't justify the cost of running.

156 is doing 50.3 mpg....reasonably spirited driving.
159 about 40 mpg.

Jim wrote:
> Catman wrote:
>> Jim wrote:
>>> Catman wrote:
>>>> Simon Mason wrote:
>>>>> The 159 died last night in the driveway. I traced the fault to the
>>>>> fact that the quick release clamp to the negative battery post was
>>>>> barely of a small enough diameter to actually grip the post. Had to
>>>>> wrap some aluminium foil around it to make it wider. Poor design.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Do you like it otherwise? I may be shopping soonish.
>>>>
>>> I like mine......159 JTD 1.9 SW. Other car a 156 JTD 1.9. Very
>>> different but both fun.
>>
>> Anyone got a V6 around?
>>
>> So what's the differences like?
>>
> The 156, though nice and solid, drives like a smaller car. The 159,
> though pretty nimble, drives like a larger car. If that makes any sense?

Yesp

>
> I've always liked smaller cars.....and quite often take the 156 out of
> choice. But when I use the 159 I am always happily surprised ( I know I
> shouldn't be) at what a good car it is...very together.

Hmm. I was never a fan of 164 / 155 / 166 for the 'larger car' thing.

> I am a diesel convert for the last 20+ years....mainly on cost grounds
> although I do like the torque. I would agree there's nothing quite like
> a nice petrol 'V' engine but I simply can't justify the cost of running.
>
> 156 is doing 50.3 mpg....reasonably spirited driving.

Bloody hell. I never got that out of my TS

> 159 about 40 mpg.

Erm, so the 159 is substantially less economical than the 156? You've
not got them mixed up?

I shall have to start test driving. Problem is my 156 is at 108k and is
probably going to cost a fortune next week (service, MOT, suspension,
tyres, cracked exhaust manifold, MAF), and it's rapidly heading towards
money pit mileage, much as I love it.

There are bery few nice 156s out there at sensible money. I don't really
want a GTA

The GT is basically a 156, but I'm not hugely keen on 2 doors right now
(and if I was, I may as well get the Maser). That leaves the 159, which
may, or may not, fit the bill if I can get a 3.2 Ti







--
Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3
Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply)
116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 GTV TS 156 V6 2.5 S2
Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see.
www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk

Jim > wrote:

> > Anyone got a V6 around?
> >
> > So what's the differences like?
> >
> The 156, though nice and solid, drives like a smaller car. The 159,
> though pretty nimble, drives like a larger car. If that makes any sense?

The 156 *is* a smaller car - much smaller.

It was designed in the early 90s when the competition was seen to be the
E36 shape BMW 3-series.

We've got a brand new Corsa hire car at the moment - the 156 looks tiny
next to it....
--
SteveH

On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 09:51:28 +0000, Catman
> wrote:

>Erm, so the 159 is substantially less economical than the 156? You've
>not got them mixed up?

Sadly he hasn't. The 159 is a heavy car compared to the 156 (hence Jim
saying it feels bigger than the 156). I think each model is about
200Kg (one American or two mother-in-laws) heavier than the equivalent
156!

I've also heard that the fuel consumption real people have been
getting out of them is, frankly, shocking and way below what you'd
hope given the published figures. Low 30mpg for the 2.4JTDm. The fatal
combo of higher weight and higher tune killing economy applies.

--
Z
Scotland
Alfa Romeo 156 2.4JTD Veloce Leather (sold)
'Oil' be seeing you..
(Email must have the word 'Alfa' in the
subject line to get through auto-filtering)